RandomNameName's comments

RandomNameName | 7 years ago | on: Tesla’s giant battery in Australia reduced grid service cost by 90%

The point behind Gigafactory1 and any subsequent gargantuan battery plants it's to drive the cost of all Tesla batteries down. Decreased cost per unit is increased margin. The reason Elon is pushing, pushing, pushing is because the longer he has the (diminishing) lowest cost of batteries, he's ahead of everyone else. People thought he was of his rocker when he bought Solar City; it's all one giant play to have the cheapest cost per battery.

Sidenote, commercial and utility battery backup like this have been sold for over 10 years. Unless you were a hotel in Vegas, you probably weren't noticing. Did they sell many, dunno, but they've been working at every distribution for a long time.

RandomNameName | 7 years ago | on: California Votes to Require Rooftop Solar Power on New Homes

The conversation was about catalytic converter as an example a government mandated solution instead of a spec. Smartfortwo cars, Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leaf, and Tesla products address the goal and bypass the spec. I was pointing out - maybe in too cheeky a way - the counter example that specs kill innovation.

RandomNameName | 7 years ago | on: California Votes to Require Rooftop Solar Power on New Homes

I'm new to this HN thing so in an attempt to be "civil" I'll simply say I disagree with every single thing you said.

The decision to implement California car emissions standards was not a heavy handed or half baked idea. The Rand corporation was called in to help figure out a solution other than catalytic converter and the ultimate decision was signed off by Ronald "not a fan of regulation" Reagan. Not only have there been improvements in the catalytic converter but also there's this company called Tesla that has innovated and provided an alternative. Your suggestion of goals was implemented in the last administration and is in the process of being removed. Lobbyists kill goals/limits.

A total net power draw is regulating the users behavior. Is that what you want?

Smaller windows or better insulation...? While home A/C is a factor, this is not about the user. This is about clean power for California (whether it's effective at producing the power is a different conversation). Users can still get better insulation or smaller windows or innovate as they see fit. California had two nuclear reactors. It has shut them down. This legislation (which I didn't know about till today) is one in a long string of movements toward cleaner air starting back in 1967.

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/about/history

An unrelated note, I hear all this talk about money As others have said, this is an economic non-starter for a home in California. One thing that has not been mentioned is that currently home appraisers do not consider solar panels in the value of a home.

page 1